Slashdot Mirror
Eric Schmidt, Jared Cohen Say Google Data Now Protected From Gov't Spying
An anonymous reader writes "Google's Eric Schmidt and Jared Cohen were [part of a] wide-ranging session at SXSW today and they revealed that Google's data is now safely protected from the prying eyes of government organizations. In the last few days Google upgraded its security measure following revelations that Britain's GCHQ had intercepted data being transmitted between Google datacenters, Schmidt said that his company's upgrades following the incident left him 'pretty sure that information within Google is now safe from any government's prying eyes.'"
Eric Schmidt likes to lie........don't believe anything from his mouth!!
Sure, the data might be safe from a government's prying eyes, but will it be safe from a government who kindly asks for the data, with the company acquiescing between it wants to maintain its lucrative business links with the authorities?
Seriously is there anyone that would actually believe such a statement?
If an experiment works, something has gone wrong.
He did not mention which government.
Buffoons, do you really think that we've already forgotten PRISM? That wasn't "hacking" by GHCQ or NSA. It was cooperation with them.
>"they revealed that Google's data is now safely protected from the prying eyes of government organizations. "
That is nonsense. The NSA could probably STILL access the information if they want to (and likely will) or Google can be compelled to reveal it with a super secret demand order, or even a regular warrant.
No information that is ever collected is ever "safe" from prying eyes. And even Google having the information is certainly nothing to be comfortable about. They have ENOUGH information about consumers already... certainly enough to be creepy.
Because he cannot even disclose his backdoor deals with the government to provide access willingly.
Also black operations methods to intercept the data via satellite and radar still exist, by observing computer and electro emissions from cables over long-range. They call this technique Van Eck Phreaking: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V...
Observe the TEMPEST emissions standards of NSA/DOD themselves, to get an idea of what signals can be remotely observed (virtually any signal can be, and they're very paranoid about unshielded cables, unshielded monitors, and unshielded computer systems): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T...
On top of that, surveillance methods using radar and satellite mind reading are wide spread, allowing them to extract passwords, what you see and hear and think and dream, and more. All the information we use to secure the data centers and our personal accounts is available and unsecure in our minds, giving them direct access using the TAMI system, "Thought Amplifier and Mind Interface," patented by Robert Malech in 1974, deployed by the NSA and DOD in 1976, and owned by EDO Corporation (now defunct and owned by ITT Corporation): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I... Yes, understandably, they don't need access to Google to steal our Google data, they can get it from our minds or by remotely watching us, as well. But lets say they want to prank and hack Google, yeah they can do that.
Robert Malech's patent is defunct but the patent and knowledge and systems obviously passed down through EDO Corporation to ITT Corporation, and Raytheon today owns other types of radar and directed-energy and remote imaging patents related. Malech's original patent, at http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi...
Raytheon's radar remote imaging and remote targeting patent for technology very similar, but perhaps covers more of the electronic systems targeting (in addition to human targeting, for slow-kill and other directed-energy abuses, plus systems hacking/tampering): http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi...
More details brought to light by CIA, DOD, and US DOJ whistleblower Dr. Robert Duncan who helped invent the system, personally programming the software for various Navy systems and US DOJ satellite systems for "tracking heart rate, breathe, and license plates from space." He has a PhD and several degrees from Harvard, Darthmouth, MIT, and has also worked for several fortune 500s. He has personally seen brain images from TAMI and helped invent these weapons systems. Details and his interviews/books at: http://www.oregonstatehospital...
Dr. Robert Duncan's biography here: http://www.coasttocoastam.com/...
Buy Dr. Robert Duncan's books:
Project: Soul Catcher: Secrets of Cyber and Cybernetic Warfare Revealed : http://www.amazon.com/gp/produ...
How to Tame a Demon: A short practical guide to organized intimidation stalking, electronic torture, and mind control : htt
OMG, there's code in Microsoft Windows too, called NSAKEY, letting them bypass all Windows secret features and install NSA signed software code. lmfao: http://www.washingtonsblog.com...
From the article, “pretty sure that information within Google is now safe from any government’s prying eyes.” Well, pretty sure just doesn't cut it for me.
I am sure that his whole industry is based on provable metrics. So the prood is in the pudding my friend ... how can we know what you claim is true. 'pretty sure' does not go very far.
and they revealed that Google's data is now safely protected from the prying eyes of government organizations.
Does anyone actually believe this? First off we know that all the government has to do is issue a National Security Letter and Google will fold like a dish cloth. Eric Schmidt isn't about to go to jail to protect you. Second, he has every reason to publicly proclaim our data is "safely protected" in order to protect his business regardless of whether it is true. Third, he cannot possibly promise that even if he genuinely believes it because he can't prove it. Fourth, even if he could somehow be sure he's keeping the government snoops out, he won't provide anyone the access necessary to verify it.
There are things they could say that I would believe but him being "pretty sure" that our data is safe just isn't really credible.
...unless, of course, they ask kinda nicely for it.
then we just hand it over.
never bring a twinkie to a food fight.
That's about how long the NSA will take to crack it; and move on.
Google's Eric Schmidt and Jared Cohen were [part of a] wide-ranging session at SXSW today and they revealed that Google's data is now safely protected from the prying eyes of government organizations.
Now what about the accusations that they were willfully co-operating behind closed doors with spying agencies? I like how the press really kept up with anything. Not only did they not bother to find that out, they didn't bother to see what safety/warnings systems are in place for a possible "tap in" of there lines. Were talking Jane and Joe public here what do they know? And would they even care?
I'm 50/50 on what possibly took place behind the public's back, let alone these BS "request letters". Someone out there that's either a journalist, or involved in the underground should really look into all of it. Not that you could believe any of it, but it would make things more interesting.
Assuming you believe this line, they're only providing countermeasures against data at rest or moving within their networks.
Does anyone remember that whole "trusted proxy" thing that's creeping into the HTTP 2.0 draft spec?
Is anyone else familiar with the MITM capabilities of a Blue Coat ProxySG device, and how widely deployed they are amongst ISPs?
right! and we are supposed to believe that just because they're saying so? is google going to break the law to support what they're saying?
and who protects us from google?
if they are so interested in protecting their users why not encrypt every user data with a key that only the user controls?
I'm not a fan of Google's, but I'm not sure why people are unwilling to recognize this is a significant step in the right direction.
Before Google took the steps necessary to ensure communications between data centers was secured, the government could (and apparently did) just slurp up everything and troll for information. Now, at least they'll need some sort of court order, which means they'll need at least a modicum of an idea what they are targeting.
The entire government system is still deeply - maybe even fatally - flawed. Even if Obama's reforms actually take place, there's still far too much power left in the hands of the secret courts and the spy agencies. But fixing this horrible, unconstitutional mess will take time and effort. Correcting (or, in this case, interfering with) even one aspect of it is welcome news.
#DeleteChrome
Sure, spying without the cooperation of Google may have gotten a bit more expensive, but that is the best-case scenario.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
While gag orders exist, we can believe nothing from an American, or a company domiciled in America, or a country beholden to America.
Sorry.
Prove anything by multiplying Huge Number times Tiny Number
They say they need a court order. How do we know they havn't just issued some secret National Security Letter or FISA warrant that says 'let us sift through everything, and we'll throw you in jail if you ever tell anyone this request was made?' This assurance is better than nothing, yes - but it doesn't change the fact that if you want to be secure from prying government eyes human or automated, you just can't trust any service provider any more. The only way to be sure is to verify security at both endpoints of any conversation, and encrypt on the assumption that all intermediary hosts and routers are compromised or monitored.
Away from the power of the US government. Then we might, possibly, believe these comments. Till then, use American tech companies last, or to provide misinformation to them...
Google's primary business is advertising. All the services they provide are there to service that business, either by allowing them to serve up more advertisments or by collecting data they can use to target those adverts with greater precision.
This would be the same Eric Schmidt who said "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place."?
And now we're expected to believe him, when he says he's keeping us safe from letting anyone know what we're doing?
He killed a lot of trust with the original comment.
He just killed a whole lot more.
All your ghosts are just false positives.
Now if we can just protect it from Google spying.
all the terrorists to communicate thru......Now all they have to do is convince the spying government terrorist of it... collect datat for a couple years then leak the hell out of it.... Then we won't have a spying problem anymore.
The only way to be safe from leaks on the internet is to not make whatever not accessible on or from the internet.
'pretty sure that information within Google is now safe from any government's prying eyes.
It doesn't work if their last round of spying got them the root password, and the backdoors planted.
They can still infiltrate the companies' datacenter employee staff with their own operatives.
And another mechanism at their disposal -- is, of course, lawful orders together with gag orders.
Man, you almost had a fucking point, till you spouted random unrelated bigotry against Israel.
Protip: when you have an agenda, and you're trying to make a point, leave your agenda out of it until much later on. Or when it's substantiated.
Now, if only my data was safe from Google's eyes...
It's actually pretty interesting to see that the "Percentage of Requests Where Some Data Produced" rate is declining. Broader searches ? or people are getting more anonymous ?
Sneak teach kids Algebra using a game
AFAIK, they were transferring the data over _their own links_. It's not like anybody else should have had access to it. But they have fixed that now.
The NSA told them to say this, right? I mean, it's not like we can really know either way, since the trust has been obliterated.
They say they need a court order. How do we know they havn't just issued some secret National Security Letter or FISA warrant...
True, but at least they have to ask for the data now. Before they could just go digging through it.
I'm not a fan of Google's, but I'm not sure why people are unwilling to recognize this is a significant step in the right direction.
Because they aren't really going to bat on this. It would be one thing if this was some big surprise to them but the KNOW the government is snooping and their response has been half-hearted at best. Google has a huge war chest to fight the good fight on this. I realize they can't do some things but they aren't doing a lot of things that they can do, including lobbying HARD on this issue. Google isn't the only one. I put just as much blame on Apple and Microsoft and Facebook and the rest of the tech giants. Want to profit on information about us? Fine, then step up and defend us in ways we cannot.
Before Google took the steps necessary to ensure communications between data centers was secured, the government could (and apparently did) just slurp up everything and troll for information.
If the government could do it, so could others and I'm pretty sure Google has some people smart enough to realize that. All this means is that if they had the ability to stop this earlier then they were either negligent or incompetent.
True, but at least they have to ask for the data now. Before they could just go digging through it.
Who is to say they still can't. With getting all tinfoil hat about it the only thing we have is Google's word on the matter. That's pretty thin.
True, but at least they have to ask for the data now. Before they could just go digging through it.
Who is to say they still can't. With getting all tinfoil hat about it the only thing we have is Google's word on the matter. That's pretty thin.
Meh, I suspect that if that were their attitude they wouldn't have drawn attention to the issue at all. They were the ones who made a big deal of the government snooping their dedicated lines.
Meh, I suspect that if that were their attitude they wouldn't have drawn attention to the issue at all.
Sure they would. They need to assure people, particularly outside the US, that they aren't the US government's sock puppet to make their business look credible. Google has ambitions outside the US you know plus they need to present a good face to their current customers so they don't go elsewhere. Though in reality it probably isn't that simple, you can explain all their actions purely in terms of profit motive. Google is trying to do just enough rather than take the painful step of actually doing the right thing. "Don't be evil" isn't the same thing as "go fight evil".
They were the ones who made a big deal of the government snooping their dedicated lines.
Kind of low hanging fruit there. It's like discovering that the NSA has bugged your bedroom. Frankly that is kind of the least of the problems.
I believe that Google has probably fixed most of the technical issues that allowed NSA (and presumably others) to eavesdrop on data in their systems.
But a company with the size and scope of Google must be *riddled* with agents of various national intelligence services, not to mention corporate spies. Think about how many engineers they have hired and acquired in the last ten years. They are a big, juicy target for espionage. As is Amazon, Microsoft, Dropbox, and any other global-scale cloud provider with thousands of corporate, education, and government accounts.
Systems can be made resistant to attack from without, but can they also be made resistant to attack from within? Not likely. How many people on Google's payroll are also on someone else's?